Measure L committee awaits the mayor’s response

The Measure L Citizens Oversight Committee heard an update to its response to Mayor Dan Clark’s controversial letter demanding changes to the committee’s format, which thus far has not generated a reaction from City Hall.

The Measure L Citizens Oversight Committee heard an update to its response to Mayor Dan Clark’s controversial letter demanding changes to the committee’s format, which thus far has not generated a reaction from City Hall.

Committee members and some from the public expressed their disappointment Monday with the fact that the mayor had not yet addressed the concerns raised in the response letter.

The mayor’s Jan. 14 letter included proposed directives of how the committee might conduct its activity, including recommending that support from city staff be limited to once a quarter.

It sparked an outcry from members of the community concerned about the mayor’s motives for wanting changes to the Measure L Committee.

The resulting backlash drew criticism and support for the committee from all sectors of the community over two council meetings and several Measure L committee meetings.

The rebuttal letter, approved and signed by the entire committee following its Feb. 11 meeting, was delivered to mayor on Feb. 21.

Committee Member Phil Salvatore asked if there had been any response or feedback from Mayor Clark.

Karen Harker, the committee’s secretarial contact, said no formal response had been received.

The committee’s response included a short cover letter to the mayor indicating the rebuttal letter “is intended to provide candid feedback and clarify the purpose of the Committee as defined by the Measure L Ordinance.”

The cover letter concluded with an invitation for the mayor to attend future meetings, indicating that the next one was Monday.

Robert Eiereman, speaking as a member of the public, expressed his desire to see the city’s media address the rebuttal letter’s contents “so the public could make their own judgment on the mayor’s action by his own letter” and the committee’s response.

“I think it is significant that the mayor was way out of term, pretending to speak for the council when he certainly was not,” Eierman said. “I think the public should be aware of not only that, but the fact that mayor started this whole brewhaha for no conceivable reason.”

Eierman said the only possible intent in his view was to “neuter the committee so it would not be in a position to object when it blatantly led the council to misspend the money.”

Eierman said his primary concern was the ambiguity behind Clark’s reasoning.

“That is the image that he has left for me and many other citizens,” he said. “He could so easily put this to bed by addressing the issue from the council dais, and in whatever way he chose to, apologize to the community for causing such discontent and dissent when there was no need for it.”

Page 2 of 2 - Stan Rajtora recommended that the committee and the public attend the City Organization Committee given that it was tasked with discussing city budget matters.

“I think the City Org meeting is a good place for anybody who is interested in the budget to participate,” he said.

Jerry Taylor pointed out the matter should be brought to the full council instead of the committee.

“They really need to have it come to the full council and not just two council members,” Taylor said. “They need to have a full meeting as a workshop or something to make the necessary major cuts, otherwise they will be borrowing more money to get through this fiscal year.”

Closing out the meeting, committee member George “Andy” Anderson commented he too was disappointed with Clark’s absence or respond to the committee.

“I’d like to know what his problems, other than the ones we addressed to him, are,” Anderson said. “If he has a problem with the committee, I would really like to know what it is.”

Salvatore pointed out the committee had the power of information on its side.

“While we can’t tell the mayor what to do, we can certainly publish information and that gives us a bit of power,” he said. “And if the city council were wise and know what is in their interest, would use our data properly to verify their intent to use Measure L money as it is intended.”

Salvatore expressed hope that the council would utilize the information compiled by the committee.

Committee Chair Eddie Thomas voiced his optimism for the committee’s progress and underscored his desire to move on.

“I’m kind of past the mayor thing,” he said. “We’ve extended ourselves, wrote letters and I want to lean more toward moving past that and on to what we can accomplish.”

Thomas said the committee had done its part and the ball was in the mayor’s court to respond in his own manner.

“I don’t want this committee or the public to stop making progress because we are headed in the right direction,” he said.